So tell me, mr0077, how can you possibly advocate the installation of a three point system over a five point system, not knowing the layout, structural strength characteristics, past history and so on of a given car? Do you think a three point system installed without study is actually safer than a properly installed five point system?

Do you really think that eyeballing a Mazda Miata or a BMW is the same as actually engineering the system for installation in a given car, then testing it by way of destruction? How can you make a generic statement to claim that a five point system is marginally better than a three point system, and go on to state how a five point system will tear out of a car (but a three point won’t)? Where is your data that a five point system is only marginally more effective than a three point arrangement? Do you have proof or is it simply conjecture?

I believe there are plenty more questions than there are answers. Arbitrarily installing safety equipment because it meets by gosh and by golly standards is certainly not the answer. I took the time to provide solid data and information on the proper mounting of five point harness assemblies, from a known and respected source. It’s your turn to prove to me, by way of a known source with appropriate data that you have the correct answer. And by the way, it is very possible to correctly install a five point system in a car such as a Cobra, without a full roll cage, following the NHRA guidelines.

The bottom line here is, we are intentionally or unintentionally messing with the safety of ourselves and others. I for one would rather take a known commodity than attempt to create a system by way of presumption.

This time, it’s your turn mate. Bring on the documentation.

Wayne Scraba
Wayne Scraba Motorsports
Kirkham Owner & Dealer